This sounds like a lot of stick that Rooney used to get. Sometimes a player is so good, we put too much pressure on them and start calling for other players to take their spot despite not being nearly as good. Right now, the first 2 names on Southgate's team sheet are Sterling and Kane. Just because a player doesn't score it doesn't mean they have been useless...
Is Sterling the best english player at the moment?
- Thread starter TsuWave
- Start date
Why do you think he is?
Well yeah, and rightfully so. Also, more pressure is on Kane than it is on Sterling, he's still considered by most to be England's main man, the captain. He's not always been great in an England shirt but he's stepped up to the plate more often than not and doesn't lose his nerve playing for his country, maybe for Sterling the pressure of being the main man is too much? I think he prefers playing alongside a bunch of world class talent at City where he's not expected to be the one they rely on, whereas Kane relishes the role as the leading man.
Also, Sterling even aside from scoring was useless for England. I've never seen a player give up possession of the ball so often whilst also failing to get any decent shots away on goal.
You seem to talk an extraordinary amount of shite when it comes to Sterling, so I probably shouldn't really bother, but perhaps re-watching most of England's WC games would be nice for starters. It's Kane who basically 'saved' his WC thanks to set piece goals, which is obviously fair enough as without that England wouldn't have been at the semis, but Sterling's non-deadball contribution to the team was certainly on a different level.
Yeah, ok. It's just me, is it?
The press gave Kane three 9/10 performances, against Colombia, Panama and against Tunisia. He wasn't anywhere near his best but he fecking stepped up to the plate and didn't wilt under pressure. Sterling spent most of the tournament on his arse or missing absolute sitters, his all round performance against Colombia was more than anything Sterling did outside of 'deadballs', regardless of the fact that set pieces are part of the game and should be included in performance ratings. Kane is a threat from them, Sterling is not.
The best Sterling was able to muster was the odd time where he beat his man and then looked threatening, only to add nothing remotely of note afterwards. Far too many times when looking at how the press rated the performances Sterling got something along the lines of 'busy, but wasted all his opportunities'. I think the highest he got rated all tournament was against Panama with a 7/10 performance, other than that he ranged from shite to anonymous.
Kane was not great at the WC, nowhere near his peak, but he did put one top performance in against Colombia and at least did what was necessary with the limited chances the team were creating. I like Sterling and he's clearly one of the best players in the league right now, but this rewriting of history where he's supposedly not actually that bad in an England shirt is ludicrous, he was shit. He always has been shit for England. His goalscoring record for the national side is genuinely an embarrassment considering he's flourished in to a genuine goalscorer at City.
I don't think he was at his best at the WC, but it would have been hard for anyone to excel being forced to play out of position chasing aimless Henderson hoofballs all tournament. He was the only England player capable of stretching defenders, but more often than not when he did get in a threatening position he had to try to do it all on his own cos Kane was marked and there was a 50 yard gap back to the nearest England midfielder. Sterling obviously performs much better in City's system.
Still clocking double shifts in this thread doing damage control for Kane because Sterling is clearly the best right now? you hate to see it
Yes, but Sterling had chances. Quite a few of them in the World Cup, and all were wasted. The formation/system England went with didn't help, but he was poor with the chances he got.
Personally I do think he will always excel as the supporting man in a brilliant side, rather than the main figure where the expectations are all on him, so naturally he thrives at City. That doesn't necessarily make him a worse player than Kane, but for me Kane would perform better for most sides, but Sterling is better in the City setup.
Last edited:
Damage control? The guy was injured and still has 17 goals and 4 assists in the league, to go with 5 in the Champions League (Sterling has two, by the way). All for a side which score far less than City do with or without Sterling, because they're much better than we are. Here, this is when you act like players don't perform better when they have top class players around them.
Sterling is quality and I have no issue if people think he's the best English player, he's earned the right to be in the discussion.
Yea fair enough. Kane is the main man for both Spurs and England for a reason. It's to Sterling's credit that he's established himself as the first supporting man on the teamsheet at City though, given all the options we've got.
There's a type of fan for whom supporting the club is almost like a religion. To those fans yes, going on about a rival player like that is an act of blasphemy. But you know majority of fans are not like that. It's just a small subset of the local match-going fans.You wouldn't feel a bit ill if there was an Arsenal fan bigging up how amazing Hazard was and saying 'what a man' ??
Fan rivalry just isn't the same these days
I'm not that type of fan, but I'm also not big on constantly bigging up how good rival players are.
It's fine acknowledging they're great players, but another thing entirely to constantly feel the need to big them up.
Yeah, I think the "what a man" bit weirded you out.
How about this. I've met a subset of fans who object to the use of "we" when referring to the team you support.
I've never understood that. Sure you're not a part of the team but fans are undeniably a part of the club, and it just makes things easier to use 'we' when referring to your club.Yeah, I think the "what a man" bit weirded you out.
How about this. I've met a subset of fans who object to the use of "we" when referring to the team you support.
Sterling and Kane are the hopeful present of England's NT.
Can see him playing for Barca or Madrid in the next year or so. He's top class.
What can they possibly offer that would interest City?
Rio absolutely spot on, specially w.r.t. treatment disparity with Harry Kane.
Yes and that's not a great sign for England
That'a the wrong question. They have to offer Sterling something he wants...
If the player wants to go there's nothing the club can do, no matter how rich city are.
Agree with the last sentiment, and Sterling obviously has a record of showing his ambition by switching clubs to meet his career goals (QPR to Liverpool to City).
The challenge for any buyer is obviously going to be price and that City will be unwilling sellers. Sterling has a contract until 2023 so he's not going to be cheap, especially with the Neymar/Coutinho/Dembele distortion at the top of the market.
He's been better than kane this season.
He's also one of the best players in the premier league this season with aguero and VVD.
If you dont think so, watch some non United games. He is absolutely electric and has qualities that aren't mentioned much like holding the ball, strength and playmaking and workrate.
He's also one of the best players in the premier league this season with aguero and VVD.
If you dont think so, watch some non United games. He is absolutely electric and has qualities that aren't mentioned much like holding the ball, strength and playmaking and workrate.
What. A. Player. He’s unreal.
His major issue was his productivity in front of goal but he’s worked hard on improving it. Class player.
Yeah, he's overtaken Kane for me, but that's fantastic. We have one of the best strikers in the world and one of the best forwards in the world coupled with the best 18 year old in the world in our starting line-up tonight.
He’s brilliant and he’s been fantastic for quite a time now. Probably I rate him higher than Kane
Exactly.
Bizzare comment.
What is going to make an Englishmen going to want to leave this City setup?
And what in earth could anyone ever possibly offer to persuade City to sell?
Him or Kane.
Both certified world-class.
Both certified world-class.
Best player in the league as well.
Is he better than hazard? Consider the disparity of the two teams
Squishy incoming to lube up Kane in 3, 2, 1...
He is a big reason as to why City is so good though. They drop a level when you replace him with a Mahrez for example.
So light on his feet, just thinking about training against him in 5/6 asides makes my hips, knees and ankles hurt. Think you are close enough to control him and then he just spins away. Fantastic balance and for a slight frame he is surprisingly strong, can run all day. Great player with his best years to come.
His development in the last 3 years just shows you that patience is essential with young players, rarely happens in a straight line, they might stall, even seem to regress for a time, but trust their ability, especially if the attitude and desire is there.
His development in the last 3 years just shows you that patience is essential with young players, rarely happens in a straight line, they might stall, even seem to regress for a time, but trust their ability, especially if the attitude and desire is there.
Yup, he’s better.
close. but hazard never had a season like sterling's in this one. 21 goal and 16 assists.
Actually thought Kane was pretty excellent tonight. He made a great pass to start the move for the first goal and played the 9 role excellently.
Heartening to see Sterling score a hat trick though, after the third goal his celebration looked really self affirming for him so I hope he kicks on for England from here.
Ok, transfermarket has him on 16 & 11 this season, which yeah, is a way off. But Chelsea have been god awful this season, whereas Man City are a goal scoring machine.
Can’t deny though he has improved immeasurably as a player, a few years ago the comparison would have been laughed at
He's a better goalscorer. Hazard is the better overall player.
He's not better than KDB or Pogba either (Sterling).